White House to Big Labor: Can you guys not pass a resolution shaming ObamaCare, please? Update: Resolution, approved

posted at 8:01 pm on September 11, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

While a handful of individual unions have already come out publicly with strong criticisms of ObamaCare and the unfortunate ways in which the law pretty much wrecks their multi-employer health insurance and hence dissolves one of the largest attractions to even being in a union, among other reasons, the AFL-CIO has declined to get too outright with their ACA-related complaints yet. They’ve maintained that they’re faithful that this was merely an unintended ‘oversight’ by the bills authors and that the White House will do them a solid and find a fix for them.

Unions have gotten increasingly frustrated, however, as the administration drags their feet on helping out Big Labor but seems to have plenty of time to cater to other interest groups. In what is clearly an application of a little nudge-nudge pressure on the White House, the AFL-CIO has been batting around the idea of formalizing their ObamaCare criticism with a resolution at their big annual convention going on this week — and the White House would really rather they didn’t, apparently. The White House certainly seems to be doing rather a lot of lobbying these days, via The Hill:

White House officials have been calling union leaders about a resolution critical of ObamaCare that is set to pass on Wednesday at the AFL-CIO convention.

Union leaders have been tight-lipped about the calls coming from Washington, but at least one labor official said he understands that the Obama administration has been watching the resolution’s progress and expressing a desire that it not move forward.

Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said the White House would rather not have the AFL-CIO pass a resolution that lays out several complaints against the healthcare law.

“My understanding is [the calls are] to encourage that the resolution not to be brought to the floor and allow the administration to address the concerns with a commitment, an attempt to resolve some of the issues,” Schaitberger said. “My understanding is that they would have preferred that no resolution be brought to the floor.”

No, they certainly wouldn’t want that — ObamaCare can ill afford the bad press, especially not from the people who were once its staunch allies, in the few weeks until its rollout.

Again, I’d guess that the White House is working to appease Big Labor in some way, but that they’re taking the time to figure out how to do so without causing too much of a ruckus — if that’s even possible.

The resolution passed by voice vote despite furious lobbying from White House officials calling on Big Labor leaders to table the resolution.

The resolution states: “The ACA should be administered in a manner that preserves the high-quality health coverage multi-employer plans have provided to union families for decades and, if this is not possible, we will demand the ACA be amended by Congress.”

The resolution put the nation’s largest organized labor federation, representing more than 12 million workers, on record saying that President Obama’s health care law is harming their existing health insurance.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Just got the email regarding my family’s insurance for next year. Basically it said “yeah, your premiums are going up (but hey, we still cover a lot of it) the coverage is getting worse (but it meets obama care minimums so you basically have to take it) and there is an obama care start up fee charged to every insured person every month for the next three years.”

I’m sure Obama is really concerned about the agitation he’s causing to a group that can’t help him in any more elections and who won’t support a Republican or even profess neutrality under any circumstances.

Don’t worry guys, if you go all-in for Hillary and then tell her “you owe us,” she’s certain to be more obliging.

Of what press do you speak? The one which tirelessly vetted Obama, the press which demanded his college transcripts be made public, or the press that made sure all the details of ACA were fully examined?

using his Gruber Microsimulation Model, in which he asserted that in 2016, young people would save 13 percent, and older people 31 percent

New Hotness

Gruber now: Obamacare will increase premiums by 19-30 percent-

In Wisconsin, Gruber reported that people purchasing insurance for themselves on the individual market would see, on average, premium increases of 30 percent by 2016, relative to what would have happened in the absence of Obamacare. In Minnesota, the law would increase premiums by 29 percent over the same period. Colorado was the least worst off, with premiums under the law rising by only 19 percent

Maybe he ‘evolved’ to this position./

But here is the ‘money quote’ from the article,

It is important to recognize some limitations in our modeling of prices. In particular, given publicly available data we cannot incorporate the effects of the ban on pre-existing conditions exclusions. This ban will cause a rise in premiums as insurers are forced to cover conditions that they had previously excluded. In addition, there are new premium taxes on insurers that will raise premium rates…Overall, we cannot predict the net impacts of these factors on premiums without more analysis.

That was what the analysis of the ACA before passage said would happen, and Gruber and Co. said that they were wrong in their assumption because they included the preexisting conditions.

Having been in the Union, these are Cadillac plans subject to additional taxes as far as I know. I have had an individual plan from a great company who every month now for about 6 months has been telling me I am grandfathered in and do not change my plan. Or I will get Obama care which you do not want. They are getting more and more blunt and detailed about the comparison with what I have and will be getting if I change. Spooky.

Why would the WH need to give an exemption to a group that will never, ever endorse or vote for Republicans?

See how this works, Unions? Maybe if you had demonstrated that you were not in the bag already the Dems would listen to you. But, see, they don’t need to. They can already count on your vote, even now. Now live in the bed you’ve made.

If I’m a union member, I don’t want to see my dues going to pay for the benefits of a non-worker unless it’s my own family.

AFL-CIO and other labor unions also pushing for AMNESTY for illegal aliens.

Again…if I’m a union member I don’t want my dues going to pay for benefits for illegal aliens… particularly since the jobs they’ll be taking are AMERICAN JOBS and will thus be putting AMERICANS out of work.

The labor unions have some big problems… and most of them are their leadership.

The resolution states: “The ACA should be administered in a manner that preserves the high-quality health coverage multi-employer plans have provided to union families for decades and, if this is not possible, we will demand the ACA be amended by Congress.”

They will demand that Congress “amend” the ACA by setting up a single-payer system. You can see it coming from light-years away.